Joel's Rant

Did you know that the NEA, the SEIU and the AFL-CIO, the unions Barack Hussein Obama endorses, have not supported a single tax cut or a spending cut, at any level of government, in over the last 30 years?  Not one!

Here we are with our national on-budget debt about to top $15 trillion, and those unions ask for higher taxes and higher spending.  Our federal government has spent over $3 trillion additional dollars in just the last 2 years, and they think spending is too low.  Virtually every state in the nation is in huge debt, and several are near financial collapse and bankruptcy, and the unions are good with that.

Why is that?  It’s because public employee unions benefit from keeping taxes rolling in and spending as high as possible.  Public employee unions need higher taxes to get higher salaries and benefits, and know spending needs to grow to make those requirements happen.  They’re like a “fifth column” in our country.

Right now the average federal worker earns about $120,000 per year in wages and benefits, plus enjoys the ironclad job security provided by civil service rules and regulations.  The average Wisconsin teacher earns about $89,000 per year in wages and benefits and is similarly protected by civil service rules and regulations, but in addition also enjoys collective bargaining rights to use as leverage against local communities wishing to rein in spending.  The average private sector worker, whose taxes support the aforementioned public employee workers, earns only about $61,000 per year in wages and benefits, and has virtually no job security.    What’s wrong with this picture?

How can anyone expect lower wage and benefit people to continue to pay the higher wages and benefits of the public employees who control a monopoly over basic community services, and who continually demand ever more in wage and benefits, and are insulated and protected from the recessions and depressions private sector workers are forced to endure?  And with politicians beholden to public employee unions for votes and campaign contributions there is no one negotiating for the taxpayers.  This is corrupt and unsustainable.  In fact, it’s sort of a “master” class versus a “slavery” class, no?

Public employee unions are the enemy of the civil society.  I’m not talking about the members; there are lots of good teachers and cops and sanitation workers and all that.  I’m talking about the unions, and the union bosses.  They’re the enemy.

But that’s not the way it was supposed to be.  The whole idea of working in the public sector was that you earned perhaps lower wages, but received in return better benefits and ironclad job security than those counterparts in the private sector.  As a public sector worker you knew that going in…….there was definitely a well understood tradeoff.

But that changed in the 1960s when Democrat governors and mayors saw that bestowing collective bargaining rights on public employee unions could more or less guarantee reelection by creating an army of happy voters beholden to those same politicians for keeping the taxpayer provided gravy train going, even if it meant promising future wages and benefits that could never be paid.  I guess those conspiring politicians are the enemy too.

It may have taken 30 years or more for the public employee unions to overplay their hands but that’s what has at last happened.  The Wisconsin and Indiana and Ohio and Michigan situations of the past several weeks have forced America to take a new look at the extortion that is bringing the economies of these and other states down and there is an interest finally to do something about them.  America is finally waking up to the corruption.

I’m hoping America will wake up to the corruption that is preventing our nation from securing the energy it needs to maintain a 21^st century technological and free society.  I recently paid $3.85 for a gallon of premium gasoline while the guy next to me was filling his tank with $3.56 a gallon of regular. Our eyes met and we both shook our heads as if to say “this really blows, no?” Yet, other than an occasional mention in the media, there is no public outrage. 

I recall just 2 ½ years ago gasoline approaching $4.00 per gallon because oil was costing over $140 per barrel and the screaming about the collapse of our economy could be heard on Mars.  If I recall, the media drumbeat blaming George W. Bush for high gasoline prices was everywhere, all the time, around the clock.  Yet now, nothing.  What’s the difference?

The difference is, obviously, Barack Hussein Obama and the media hypocrisy.  Don’t forget, the media is merely the public relations arm of the Democrat Party and the Democrat Party is the federal government.  They are all as one, in bed with each other, part of the same genre. In effect, there’s the federal government, and then there’s the Republican Party.  That’s pretty much it.  Ergo, you can have $4.00 gasoline and hatred for George W. Bush; and you can similarly have $4.00 gasoline and admiration for Barack Hussein Obama.  Am I wrong?

I suppose we’re pretty lucky that oil is presently priced at only $104 per barrel, but when that changes you should expect gasoline prices to “necessarily skyrocket.”  That’s what Barack Hussein Obama said in his January 2008 comment to the San Francisco Chronicle in which he talked about energy prices under his administration, that they would “necessarily skyrocket.”  Yes, he seems to be a man of his word.

So here we are, facing instability and unrest in the oil rich Middle East, and the Barack Hussein Obama administration is purposely choking off all new oil exploration and drilling in the United States.  He’s currently defying a federal court order to resume drilling offshore in the Gulf of Mexico, and has refused to provide drilling licenses off the coasts of California, Florida and Alaska or anywhere else off shore of America.  How, as a great nation, can we let one guy, one single guy, do this to us?  Where does he suppose gasoline comes from?  Where does he get the chutzpah?

And what sense does it make to force energy prices higher, which he deliberately is trying to do?  At what per-gallon price will you purposely begin to curtail your own driving?  Let’s assume you’ll do less driving than normal when the price reaches $5.00 per gallon, which may not be very long from now.  That’s means your neighbors will likely do the same thing, if they can. 

Obviously, the first type of driving to be curtailed will be things like going to the mall and the movies and discretionary driving like that, which means the people working in those kinds of places will start to be laid off, which means they’ll be collecting unemployment benefits, and maybe social services benefits, which means they’ll be beholden to the government. 

And don’t forget the rising costs for the people driving food to your grocery store and how the costs of food and everything else that needs to be delivered, which is virtually every product you need to carry on your life, will be going up.  And don’t forget the price of every product made with petroleum products will be going up, which includes everything from Glad-Wrap and cosmetics to life saving drugs.

And all of this an intentional effort to raise costs, all brought to you by your government, your Democrat controlled government, your government administered by Barack Hussein Obama.  It’s all intended, it’s all purposeful, and it’s all been planned this way.  Buy why?

When Barack Hussein Obama was running for President he made it quite clear, and to cheering and adoring crowds, that his aim was to “fundamentally change America.”  He said that, right?  Everyone knows he said that, and in pretty much those exact words. 

You don’t do “fundamental change” to things you love.  If you love something you don’t fundamentally change it.  You may tweak it, but you never fundamentally change it.  That changes “it” into something totally different, right?  But you do make “fundamental change” to things you hate.  Am I wrong?

I’m sorry to say that Barack Hussein Obama hates America.  There, I said it, and I meant it.

That’s why he supports the public employee unions destroying the financial stability of the states, and why he supports the purposeful raising of living costs in an effort to put people on the government dole, to keep people victims, so they can be controlled by government.  It all makes sense.

And that’s all there is to it.

Tomorrow the nation will be treated once again to the display of our president bringing his yearly “State of the Union” message to Congress and the American people, as required by the Constitution of the United States.  Yes, it’s actually mandatory that the president do this. 

This constitutional requirement might come as a surprise to some in our political class, like John Conyers, Democrat Congressman for 40 years, and until recently Chairman of the powerful House Judiciary Committee, who when asked defended ObamaCare’s constitutionality by sighting the “good and welfare clause”.  Note to Congressman Conyers; there is no “good and welfare clause.”  Does Conyers even understand the Constitution?  Don’t ask long time veteran Democrat Congressman John L. Lewis, who apparently believes the Constitution justifies Obamacare’s mandate that people must buy health insurance because of the “pursuit of happiness clause”.  Note to Congressman Lewis; there is no “pursuit of happiness clause” and besides, the famous phrase “pursuit of happiness” appears in the Declaration of Independence, not the Constitution.  This spectacle would be downright laughable if the men making complete fools of themselves weren’t so powerful and disdainful of the laws that make our country the only indispensable nation on Earth.

One may think these are merely minor misstatements, but are they?  These people are among those making decisions that affect the lives of you and your family and the security of our nation.  Do they know where their authority to govern us comes from?  Do they know that the Constitution protects individual liberty, not the public good, whatever that is?

It’s interesting that just a few weeks ago the Republicans in the House of Representatives voted to begin their first session, as the majority, with a reading of the Constitution of the United States.  As you’ll recall Democrats of all stripes, liberals and progressive pundits and mainstream media sycophants called the action stupid and mindless and even implied that the most important political document ever written in the history of man had become irrelevant.   Did they forget that they took an oath to protect and defend the concepts written in this very document?  I find it pretty ironic that recently shot Congresswoman, Gabrielle Giffords, was one of those who agreed to read some of the Constitution, as the Republican caucus requested, and in fact read from the First Amendment, the one guaranteeing the right to free speech. 

No sooner had the smoke cleared than Democrats and their media minions began to promulgate a scurrilous lie, filled with wishful hate, a blood libel, that somehow rhetoric from the political right had spawned this tragic carnage.  No sooner had the smoke cleared than leftist pundits and reporters clamored for more “civility” (code word for “conservative political censorship”) from those on the right.

(You might want to click on http://michellemalkin.com/2011/01/10/the-progressive-climate-of-hate-an-illustrated-primer-2000-2010/ if you want an astonishing and detestable review of the rhetoric that came from the political left over the past 10 years.  It’s really quite contemptible.)

I for one believe the vitriolic rhetoric, in fact, is not high enough.  Our voices, the voices of the conservative right, need to be heard.  Those who occupy the highest political offices in our country repeatedly lie to us, yet the president will appear tomorrow to talk about his agenda, going forward, as if the past two years had never happened; as if he became president only yesterday.  Yes, the new branding of Barack Obama is in full swing by the vampires in the mainstream media.  Yes, Barack’s a centrist, he’s concerned about the nation’s debt, he’s concerned about America being competitive, he’s very concerned.

Well, it just so happens that the truth has no agenda.  As the president gives his speech, let’s remember what he has done to our country.

Let’s remember ObamaCare.  Just for a moment, leave the issue of this law’s constitutionality aside; leave the CBO’s scoring of this law using corrupt and purposely fraudulent figures aside; leave aside the fact that ObamaCare will change forever the relationship every citizen of this country has with the government.  Did you know that come 2013, that 3.8% of the profit you realize from selling your home will go to pay for ObamaCare?  Did you know illegal immigrants are covered?  Did you know the government will have electronic access to all of your bank accounts and can transfer funds out without you even being advised?  Did you know that doctors will not be allowed to build new hospitals, even if they’re ready, willing and able to, and that hospital expansion will be prohibited?  When ObamaCare goes into full swing in 2014 all doctors will be paid the same regardless of specialty and all fees will be set by the government?  Did you know doctors will be penalized for requiring more medical tests, even if they believe they’re necessary?

What do you suppose just that very small sampling of what’s contained in that 2700 page law means to the medical care you can expect for you and your family?  Imagine what else is contained in ObamaCare’s language that has not yet seen the light of day?  You can draw your own conclusions.

How about the unelected bureaucrats of the EPA setting carbon limits that raises the costs of everything manufactured in “smoke-stack industries like autos, steel, energy and the like?  The Congress already refused to raise these limits but the president’s political appointee is doing it anyway in an end-around move to force manufacturing into a central planning Politburo situation.

How about the Dodd-Frank financial industries law that raises the cost of capital, does nothing to halt the potential for bailing out institutions deemed too-big-too-fail, never mentions to words Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac even one single time, and in fact leaves all the details of this law to the completely subjective discretion of nameless and unelected bureaucrats.  How about the government taking over GM and Chrysler and effectively giving those companies over to the United Auto Workers union and refusing to uphold previous and lawful contracts with primary lenders?

How about official 10% unemployment, climbing to almost 20% unofficial unemployment when part-time workers and those who’ve dropped out of the labor market are counted?  How about record foreclosures continuing without end?  How about more people living in poverty than ever before?  How about 50 million people using Food Stamps?  How about America borrowing 40 cents of every dollar spent by the government, amounting to over $1 Trillion in additional debt each year for the next 10 years?  How can the economy be improving when more net jobs are lost each and every month than those that are gained?

This all happened over the past two years and is continuing.

How about Obama literally changing the mission of NASA from developing technology and creating miracles to teaching Muslim nations that they should be proud of inventing algebra (which, by the way, the Chinese did, not the Muslims)?  How about the Justice Department attacking Arizona?  How about the Justice Department dropping the voter intimidation prosecution of the New Black Panther party? 

How about Barack Obama’s FCC Chairman attempting to gain control over the internet with this new Net Neutrality regulation plan?  How about the government pulling the plug on all Gulf oil drilling, costing 20,000 gulf-area jobs, devastating local economies and driving the cost of gasoline to over $3.20 with no end in cost escalation in sight?

I can go on and on.  It’s unending what’s happened in just two years.  And none of that even includes anything beyond the shores of our country.  There’s Iran, Syria, North Korea, Russia, missile defense, new START, cancelling the F-22 fighter, Venezuela, China, Hezbollah and more.  And how about the new policy to allow romance and sexual tension onto the battlefield over the objections of battlefield commanders?

Barack Obama and his minions truly believe the people of this country are idiots, and unfortunately many people are.  But not all of us, not you and me.  We know what’s been going on.  This guy has a two year record, for crying out loud.

And then, out of nowhere, last week the Democrat governor of Hawaii inexplicably raises the issue of Barack Obama’s birth and citizenship.  He comes out in public and purposely states that he’s going to release Barack Obama’s long sought after “long-form” birth certificate so that this “Birther” issue can finally be put to rest.  Had he consulted with the White House before making this statement?  Who knows?

Here’s what we do know.  There ain’t no “long-form” birth certificate.  He inexplicably can’t find it.  What a goof this guy Neil Abercrombie is.  What he does have are some notes, whatever that means.

So here’s the truth, as I see it, and I’m not embarrassed by saying this.  Barack Obama was born in Kenya, to a very unstable and troubled woman.  This woman’s parents, while practicing Communists themselves, and realizing their daughter might be a nut, were not themselves idiots, and quickly realized that their newly born grandson would have a better chance at life and survival if he were an American citizen rather than a Kenyan.  So they trotted down to the local Hawaii BVS and made a statement that their grandson had been born in Hawaii.  They even gave their address as Barack’s address.  According to the regulations at the time, no proof of that statement needed to be offered.  That’s why the document the White House long ago produced was a “Certificate of Live Birth” (COLB), not a birth certificate.  The Hawaii authorities presently state that the COLB is not proof of birth in Hawaii.  They say that now!

So the grandparents get their COLB, and for good measure, they place a notice of birth in the local newspaper.  Remember, they’re not idiots; in fact they’re only trying to protect their grandson. That notice probably cost them maybe $5 in 1961 money.  Maybe it even cost them less than that.

And that’s why there’s no “long-form” birth certificate.  And that’s why Barack Obama is not a citizen of the United States.  But it doesn’t matter because not enough people really care about this, or because they’re afraid of being called irrational, when in fact to think he’s not a citizen is extremely rational.

 And that’s all here is to it.

It all seemed so possible just a few weeks ago, that the Governor’s race in New York would be a toss-up and the seemingly anointed and self-important Andrew Cuomo, son of liberal icon and former New York Governor Mario Cuomo, could actually lose to underdog Carl Paladino, the inexperienced but tough as nails businessman from depressed Buffalo.  Now, after some ostensibly inexcusable remarks in which Paladino tried to explain that children shouldn’t be taught in school that homosexuality is acceptable and that while he supports gay rights he opposes gay marriage, the previous close horse race for Governor seems to have changed into a potential romp in favor of the liberal Democrat.  With the coming fiscal collapse of the State of New York you’d think the voters would focus on the mismanagement and political corruption of their present leaders instead of excoriating Paladino for mentioning the issue of teaching about homosexuality in the public schools, to sometimes very young children.  How much more irrelevant to the coming collapse of the state government could Paladino’s clumsy remarks have been, but that’s not the case, in this case, right?

Lost in the new Paladino narrative that says he’s not only anti-human rights, that he may now even be anti-human, is the fact that Andrew Cuomo is one of the architects of the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac financial debacle that nearly crashed the economy of the entire United States.  As Secretary of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) under Bill Clinton, Andrew Cuomo wrote the policy that forced banks, under penalty of law, to make mortgage loans to people who could never afford to pay back their debt, making failure, foreclosure and financial collapse inevitable.  That’s a fact.

It was Andrew Cuomo who further wrote the policy that required banks to count welfare payments and unemployment benefits as income in determining mortgage eligibility.  It was under the leadership of Andrew Cuomo that HUD developed the infamous “no income mortgage” and the equally infamous “no documentation mortgage”.  That’s also a fact.

When at first banks started to balk, Andrew Cuomo enlisted Attorney General Janet Reno to threaten banks with licensing and merger rejections if they did not tow the HUD line of getting loans to those least able to repay their debt.  In fact, under the direction of Andrew Cuomo, banks were required to make certain that about 50% of the mortgages they wrote had to go to the so-called “disadvantaged.”  We all know how that worked out, and yet he’s the front runner.  And that’s a fact.

And what did Carl Paladino do to take the oxygen completely out of this race?  He essentially had the temerity to take exception to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit ruling that parents cannot take their kindergarteners out of Massachusetts public-schools classes that teach 5-year-olds that same-sex marriage is a good thing. He essentially questioned how a federal judge in San Francisco, in ruling that same-sex marriage is a constitutional right, could declare that children do not need both mothers and fathers and do just as well being raised by same-sex couples, even though there’s no evidence of that anywhere.  The fact that New York State presently pays more in their budget for Medicaid than both Texas and Florida combined should be good reason for voter anger, yet Paladino’s questioning teaching about homosexuality in public schools has his legitimacy being questioned, while no one’s asking Andrew Cuomo any questions.  Go figure!

Except for California, New York is the next closest to bankruptcy and financial ruin of any other state in the nation.  To resolve that potentially disastrous situation, New Yorkers can vote for Andrew Cuomo, with his record of failure, financial ruin and political correctness, or they can vote for Carl Paladino who has vowed to reduce spending and taxes in New York by 20% and has the business acumen to do just that.  Yet it’s Carl Paladino who’s considered the extremist.

At a debate earlier this week, the Democrat nominee for Senator in Delaware, Chris Coons, similarly labeled Republican Christine O’Donnell “an extremist”.  He even made a special attempt to bring up her high school “witchcraft activities” to further prove his point.  Interestingly, when Coons ran for County Executive four years ago he promised not to raise taxes, yet went ahead and raised them three times in those four years to pay for his increased spending that helped drive his county to near bankruptcy.  Yet it’s Christine O’Donnell who’s considered the extremist.

And then there’s the curious case of Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, the partner of Barack Obama, or maybe the puppet of Barack Obama, leading the charge to pass the $872 billion stimulus bill (increasing to over $1.2 trillion when interest is included) and the disastrous ObamaCare health reform legislation that 60% of the nation wants repealed. 

Isn’t it interesting that earlier this week Barack Obama himself stated that there’s no such thing as “shovel ready” projects and that the money planned for those activities, for which the stimulus law was specifically passed, was essentially spent on other stuff that did not stimulate the economy at all?  In fact, only 3% of the “stimulus money” actually went for “shovel ready” programs, the rest being spent on paying public employee union workers and shoring up entitlement spending.  But Harry Reid supported all of it.  In fact, Harry Reid was one of the architects of that trillion dollar fiasco that future generations will have to pay back long after most of us are gone.  Even now, Harry Reid supports Barack Obama’s call for another $200 billion stimulus on top of the $872 billion, this time to really really be spent on the infrastructure projects the earlier stimulus was supposed to cover that never did.  We’re being played for suckers and Harry Reid has no problem being Obama’s field general to make that happen.

Oh, and while our armed forces were engaged in actual combat with Islamic barbarians, putting someone else’s sons and daughters and husbands and wives and fathers and mothers in harm’s way, Harry Reid stated to the entire world that the war in Iraq was lost.  In his never ending effort to actually get American forces defeated so Democrats would have a political advantage in future elections, Harry Reid gave aid and comfort to our enemies, helping them recruit and continue to carry the battle further.  Yet it’s Sharron Angle who’s considered the extremist.

I could go on and on but the important point is to ask who exactly are the extremists in these and other races all around the country.  Let’s look at the record.

In the past 21 months a record number of housing foreclosures have occurred, with no decrease in sight.  There are now over 43 million American living in poverty, the most in U.S. history.  Over 50 million people now receive food stamps; that’s one of every 6 Americans.  Another 50 million Americans are presently on Medicaid and another 30 million will be added to that number once the full impact of ObamaCare begins in 2014.

Before Democrats took control of both houses of Congress in January 2007, the last Republican Congress budget had a $171 billion dollar deficit.  Once Democrats started writing and passing the budgets, in the last two years of the Bush administration, the deficits rose immediately to over $400 billion.  In the past 2 years, Obama’s budget deficits have been $1.4 trillion each with additional $1 trillion budget deficits expected in each of the next 10 years, and that’s assuming nothing additionally bad happens.  Because of these Democrat actions, the accumulated national debt will effectively triple by the year 2020 to over $20 trillion, and will exceed the debt of every president from George Washington to George W. Bush combined.

Now let’s be absolutely clear; it’s the Congress, not the President, who determines spending and passes budgets.  The President only approves or vetoes what the Congress passes.  The “monthly deficits” presently being passed under Democrats by this Congress, and approved by this present President, now exceeds the “yearly deficits” passed under Republicans.  And it’s the Republicans who are the extremists?

Unemployment officially stands at 9.6%, while the underemployment percentage is over 17% and in some states over 20%.  Those are depression-era numbers that will not improve; in fact those are numbers that cannot possibly improve because of the anti-business, anti-free market and anti-capitalist environment and policies the Democrats in Congress and the President have pursued since January 2009.  The raising of corporate taxes and personal income taxes, new regulations, uncertainty over health care provisions and premiums, cap & trade taxation, EPA regulations and rulings, bailouts of favored industries over the free market, and the continued and constant attack against banks, entrepreneurs, insurance companies, big corporations, wealthy Americans, and any small business “grossing” over $250,000 means no new job growth will created for the foreseeable future.  None.  Our present economy is our future economy, the economy your children and grandchildren will inherit.  And it’s the Republicans who are the extremists?

Democrats have closed the Gulf to offshore drilling, foreclosed on the licensing process for new nuclear power plants, and crippled the coal industry with regulations and threats of cap and trade, all in an effort to starve the American economy of the energy lifeblood it needs to compete economically with the rest of the world.  A nation without access to cheap and continual energy supplies is a nation committing national suicide. And it’s the Republicans who are the extremists?

And that’s just some of the stuff the Democrats, the President and their minions have done.  I’m not even talking about the Black Panther fiasco, Supreme Court Justices who believe the government can force you to eat three vegetables a day, or the racism epidemic at the Eric Holder Justice Department.

So here’s the real truth.  Carl Paladino is not an extremist.  Tea Party candidates like Sharron Angle, Christine O’Donnell, Rand Paul, Joe Miller and others are not extremist. Sarah Palin is not an extremist. Candidates that speak of the Constitution and American exceptionalism are not extremist.  People who believe in limited government, personal property, personal responsibility and understanding the government works for the people and not the other way around are not extremist.  Neighbors and friends who stand up and take to the streets and proclaim that enough is enough and demand accountability from our so-called leaders are not extremist.

But every Democrat is an extremist.  That’s a fact.

And that’s all there is to it.

What a week for Barack Obama and the Democrats?  I think they really revealed themselves in a most dastardly fashion.

Obama is revealed; by of all people the liberal pundit, author, and Sunday morning mainstream media favorite Bob Woodward, as demonstrably ambivalent about the Afghanistan War and in fact only cares about how the so-called “good war” will play out politically for him and his runaway agenda. 

Even though he campaigned furiously about the importance of winning in Afghanistan, Woodward, who was given free rein to wander the halls of the White House and to talk to anyone without restriction, portrays a president thinking only of himself and his place in history.  That campaign tough talk was all a ruse, a fake, a fraud.  It was all “so Obama.”  Why am I not surprised.

The ramifications of Obama’s dysfunctional coldness and narcissism does not much interest me here because the real issue that every American should feel and care about is how could he order over 100,000 American troops into harm’s way when all he cares about is spending more money on his failed domestic policies?  The American’s presently fighting this war are someone’s sons and daughters, or husbands and wives, or fathers and mothers, or loved ones and friends and represent real people who have their own lives to lose.  How could he possibly send them to a place where they can easily be killed when he doesn’t give a hoot for the mission to which he clearly falsely claimed was a war that must be won?  He lied, he lied, and in a very real and horrible way, people have literally died.  Literally.  What kind of person does that?  How did we let that happen?

But there’s more. 

Earlier this week, a former Voting Chief for the Civil Rights Division of the Barack Obama-Eric Holder Justice Department, testified under oath before the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, that the DOJ is purposely ignoring civil rights cases that involve white victims.  What the fudge is that all about?  In fact, Christopher Coates, formerly a top attorney for the ACLU and once the lead attorney in the New Black Panthers Party case, for crying out loud, even called the dismissal of charges against the Black Panthers a “travesty of justice.”

Coates stated that Obama political appointees dismissed the case because they are opposed to enforcing civil rights laws in a racially neutral fashion.  Coates testified that he was reprimanded by Acting Assistant Attorney General Loretta King when he asked attorneys in job interviews if they could enforce the law equally.  He claimed King took offense because she does not support equal enforcement of the provisions of the Voting Rights Act.

To repeat, all of that was testified to by Coates under oath.

That testimony corroborated earlier testimony by J. Christian Adams, also formerly a high level attorney at the DOJ’s Civil Rights Division, that Obama political appointee Julie Fernandes made it clear that the Voting Section at the Justice Department would not be bringing any more cases against “traditional national racial minorities”, like the members of the New Black Panthers Party.

So the Democrat Party, the party of inequality and blatantly racist preferential treatment, strikes again.  It’s clear the DOJ will not enforce the laws which it does not agree with.  If that’s not a definition of tyranny, what is?  What kinds of people do that?  How did we let that happen?

But there’s more.

There does not appear to be a single Democrat running for reelection this year who is embracing the “achievements” of the Obama-Reid-Pelosi legislation of the past 20 months.  If anyone knows of a Democrat running toward that agenda, please let me know.

So here are the Democrats, virtually every single one of them, who voted for $862 Billion in stimulus money even though the recession had ended in July 2009, before any stimulus money had even been spent, for Cap & Trade “Soviet-style” industrial central planning, for ObamaCare legislation that could only be passed by deception, coercion and malfeasance, and for takeovers and bailouts, for turning their backs and pretending they had absolutely nothing to do with it.  Somehow all of that economic destruction happened all on its own.  They don’t know about it, they weren’t anywhere near the Capitol Building when it was passed, it must have been someone else, the dog ate their homework and on and on.

The point is the Democrats in Congress are unprincipled leaches on our civil society.  I suppose there are some Republicans that are just as disgusting, but at least virtually none of them had anything to do with the stuff that has generated over $3 Trillion in new debt in just 20 months, forced a record number of Americans onto Medicaid and Food Stamps, generated the most housing foreclosures in history, grew unemployment from 7.5% on January 19, 2009 to 10% today with the unofficial unemployment rate actually at almost 18% and to over 20% in some states, and have taken over the health decisions of every American.  No, that’s just the Democrats, they did that, it’s all on them and none of them will take responsibility.   How did we let that happen?

And what about the voters?  I think there really is something to the old saying that you get the government you deserve.  Just look at what’s about to happen in New York State, for example.

They have Andrew Cuomo running for Governor and he is ahead in his race by about 8 points or so.  What makes that so difficult to believe is that it was Cuomo, while head of Bill Clinton’s Department of Housing and Urban Development, who instructed banks, under pain of law, to make loans to people who could never afford to pay the loans back.  It was Cuomo who decided that welfare payments and unemployment payments must be called income and included in the calculation for the purposes of determining mortgage approval.  It was Cuomo who went to Clinton’s Attorney General Janet Reno to demand actions against banks that did not accept Cuomo’s lending requirements.  But New Yorkers are still favoring Cuomo and will likely elect him to Governor of their bankrupt and mismanaged state.  Go figure!

And then there’s Kirsten Gillibrand running for Senator and leading her opponent by about 10 points.  It was Gillibrand to whom Cuomo turned while he was at HHS to find ways to make it easier for otherwise ineligible people to get mortgages.  It was Gillibrand who developed the infamous “no-income” mortgage and infamous “no-proof” mortgage.  She was one of the leaders of the policy that lead directly to the mortgage and financial crisis our nation is presently suffering through.  But New Yorkers will likely make her a Senator for another 6 years.  You can’t make this stuff up.

But wait, let’s not leave out Senator Chuck Schumer, also running for reelection and is leading his opponent by a whopping 23 points or more.  It was Schumer, along with Chris Dodd and Barney Frank, who objected to reigning in Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and making sure only Democrats like Franklin Raines, Frank Johnson and Jamie Gorelick were allowed to lead these entities and take bonus and salary in the millions. Raines actually took over $90 million in salary and bonuses while Gorelick took over $20 million.  But Schumer has a complete lock on reelection bestowed upon him by admiring New Yorkers.  That’s bullcrap!

When that kind of constituent thinking permeates the Democrat party you know our country is in mortal danger.

And isn’t that what we’ve learned again this week?  That it doesn’t take much to turn our great nation into a near Third World backwater? 

These people have got to go.  Voters need to wise up. 

Regardless of your lifetime political persuasion, this time you need to do something positive for the future of our country.  This time you need to do something positive for your family’s future, for your children and grandchildren.  This time you need to vote like your very life depends on it. 

This year you need to vote Republican.

And that’s all there is to it.

Just before the polls had closed on Tuesday, the great and wise Charles Krauthammer and the ideologically liberal Juan Williams appeared together in a panel on Fox News to discuss the potential for a Christine O’Donnell victory in Delaware.  This was a full 2 hours before Karl Rove appeared on Hannity to pronounce Christine O’Donnell a personality failure of suspect character.  During that panel Krauthammer essentially indicated that the “weak and dubious” O’Donnell had no business taking a certain Republican Senatorial victory away from the liberal Mike Castle, while Williams replied that the excitement generated by the Tea Party is what has introduced new and fresh candidates, bringing an unapologetic conservative ideology to the attention of the voters. 

 I never thought this could happen, but I take Juan Williams over Charles Krauthammer on this one.  Go figure!

 But without getting too deep in the weeds, let’s all focus on what’s important here for a moment.  If O’Donnell had already been in the Senate she would have voted against Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor.  She would have voted against ObamaCare, cap & trade, stimulus spending, government takeovers of GM, student loans and AIG.  She would have voted against bailouts and the latest finance bill and would definitely vote against future Card Check, the Disclosure Law and VAT tax legislation which are sure to be introduced by the Democrats if they maintain control in Congress.  She definitely would vote FOR extending the Bush tax cuts and possibly for eliminating the Departments of Education, Commerce and maybe even Energy, all of which essentially serve no purpose. 

 The fact that she may have suffered a foreclosure means nothing; so have a lot of people.  The fact that she may have defaulted on a loan is immaterial; so have lots of people in this economy.  O’Donnell claims both of those issues are mischaracterizations and explains them both away on her campaign website, which also provides IRS and mortgage bank documents online to support her replies (http://christine2010.com/christine-counters/) for those interested in drawing their own conclusions.

The important point, for those looking for a new direction in this country, is that both Mike Castle and her Democrat opponent Chris Coons would have voted the exact opposite of O’Donnell on the issues that count. 

 A review of Mike Castle’s voting record over the past several years includes the following:

Voted YES on TARP
Voted YES on Cap and Trade
Voted YES on Cash for Clunkers
Voted YES on the auto bailout
Voted YES on bailing out Fannie and Freddie
Voted YES on SCHIP (along with its companion tax increase)
Voted YES to increase taxes on oil and gas companies
Voted YES to increase the minimum wage
Voted YES on the pork-infested 2005 Highway bill
Voted YES to increase funding for PBS
Voted YES on the Medicare drug benefit
Voted YES on No Child Left Behind
Voted YES on McCain-Feingold
Voted NO to end milk subsidies
Voted NO on waiving Davis-Bacon labor rules

Voted NO on Iraqi troop surge

Voted NO to open up ANWR

Voted NO to restrict eminent domain abuse

It doesn’t get more liberal than that.  Mike Castle is a liberal and would have continued voting liberal along with every liberal Democrat in Congress and along with Barack Obama.

This brings us to the issue of liberalism and what they believe and where they want to take the country. 

It was just announced last week that poverty in this country has hit a record high as the rate jumped from 13.2% to 14.3%, translating into 43.6 million people living below the poverty line.  And that doesn’t include those millions living just above the poverty line but are one bad break away from entering that netherworld of despair.  That’s the most people in the history of the nation.  In addition, over 60 million people receive Food Stamps and 50 million people are already on Medicaid.  Once ObamaCare kicks in, that number will jump to 80 million people on Medicaid; that’s fully 25% of the entire nation on medical assistance specifically meant for poor people and those living below the poverty line. 

Those are numbers not seen since at least the 1960’s and reflects the failure of liberal poverty spending programs that have taken over $20 trillion out of the private, job creating, economy since 1964’s so-called “War on Poverty”.  Think of the state of our nation today had that $20 Trillion been invested, by the free market and private enterprise, in general research & development, transportation, medical and pharmaceutical development, bio-engineering, energy assets and development, communications and all the other ventures that have produced the most successful society and highest standard of living for all its citizens in the history or the Earth. 

Just think what the poverty population in this country would be had that $20 Trillion been used to create jobs instead of creating victims and handouts and placing people on lifetime assistance.  We’re already seeing 4^th generation welfare recipients in this country.

And what’s the liberal response to these facts?  More spending and blaming George W. Bush for the federal deficit.  Yes, of course, all of this was caused by the Bush tax cuts.  Really?  Let’s cut to the chase and dispel the myth that the Bush tax cuts caused the deficit. 

Actually, in 2002, tax revenues were $1.85 trillion.  In 2007, after the tax cuts had gone into effect, revenues had grown to $2.57 trillion, a 39% increase.  Unfortunately, spending by a Republican Congress outpaced treasury revenues and so the deficit grew.  But never, not even one time during the Bush administration, did any Democrat in Congress state that the budget being passed was too high.   Never did any Democrat call for reducing spending during the Bush years, unless, of course, the spending was for the Defense Department.  Barack Obama, Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton, and all the rest voted every single time for increased spending and complained only when spending wasn’t higher.  And those are the facts.

Barack Obama and his minions somehow believe that “the well off” or “the well connected” people in this country have explicitly conspired to shaft the “middle class”.  Their philosophy of class warfare is right out of the Saul Alinsky’s “Rules for Radicals” and begs the question of where exactly on the income scale does Barack Obama divide the country between “us” and “them”? 

In 2007, the top 1% of income earners were those making $410,000 or more per year, and they paid 40% of all income taxes.  The top 5% were those making over $160,000 per year, and they paid 60% of the income taxes.

Doesn’t the real antidote to poverty lie in getting this top 5% or so to create the jobs to hire the millions presently receiving assistance?  Isn’t that the only way?  The Reagan years tax cuts saw over 21 million new jobs created.  The Bush years (yes, the George W. Bush years) tax cuts saw 8 million new jobs created.  And those numbers are real and don’t include any accounting gimmicks like “jobs saved.” 

Isn’t Conservatism the antidote to Liberalism? 

The lines being drawn in this country could not be clearer and those lines are being highlighted by the Tea Party movement and those that understand what’s at stake.  As the great Mark Levin has stated, those differences are stark and grim and separate the views of Conservative’s from the views of Liberal’s and include the following:

We believe in the Founders, they believe in Karl Marx,

We believe in liberating the individual, they believe in controlling the individual,

We believe in being able to keep what you earn, they believe in stealing what you earn,

We believe in American citizenship, they believe in Global citizenship,

We believe in American greatness, they believe in American arrogance,

We believe in representative government, they believe in big government,

We believe in liberating and protecting victims, they believe we’re colonialists and imperialists,

We believe in limited government, they believe in unfettered government,

We believe in putting people in control, they believe in controlling the people.

We believe in liberty, they believe in tyranny.

And that’s all there is to it.